An anonymous
citizen recalled an incident at a commission meeting 17 years ago when he
claimed Commissioner Coulter taunted him by asking him if he was having fun
several times. He said Commissioner Coulter later used the phrase “get a
life.” In closing he asked the Commission if they were having fun.

Peter Warfield
said last June the BOS Finance Committee allocated $480,000 for more branches
to be open on Sundays. The funding was put on reserve pending a plan for
additional branch hours on Sundays. He asked for the status of the plan.

John McAbee,
member of the Board of Directors of the Friends, announced that there will be a
reception tomorrow evening at the Friends office to celebrate the 10th
anniversary of the African America Center in the Main. Book Bay at Fort Mason will move to a new larger space close to the space it currently occupies.
The annual “Writers Remembered” event will be held in the Koret Auditorium on
January 27th. He thanked commissioners for their hard work.

Donna Bero,
Executive Director of Friends of the Library, reported that they have received
$500,000 grant from the David B Gold Foundation for five of the branches in the
BLIP campaign. They also recently received a $50,000 gift from Grace and
Steven Voorhis, neighbors in the West Portal area.

Ellen Egbert
said she was disappointed that some commissioners had not been to the Excelsior
Library until the last Commission meeting. She urged Commissioners to visit
all the branches to see them before and after BLIP renovations.

Commissioner
Higueras arrived at 4:19 pm.

AGENDA ITEM
#2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 19, 2006

Public
Comment:

An anonymous
citizen said the minutes show the presence of a new hand and that they did
contain a summary of what people said at the meeting. He said that the
Commission would no doubt have a future meeting without legal notice to discuss
the policy of minutes. He said the minutes misrepresented all the speaker
comments under the public comment section. He said that Demece Garepis, a
donor, said that the Bernal preschool was going into Paul Revere School where it belonged. He recalled that Denise Shucks spoke carefully about two incidents
involving library security officers. He said that she witnessed security hasseling
a patron trying to leave and that she recounted an experience when Security
told a child that he was too young to come to the Library. He said the minutes
should have included that the City Librarian said he would look into both matters.

Peter Warfield said
that he has been spending several months trying to track down simple facts
about the Library’s policies and practices regarding the purchase of out of
print books and materials and the monitoring of books that are missing or leave
the collection. He said the Library’s statements on these issues have been
contradictory. He proposed that his public comment in Agenda Item #1 be changed
to “…questioned how reliable the Library statements are regarding purchasing of
out of print materials.”

Commissioner Higueras
asked that Peter Warfield’s comments be amended in these minutes. Commissioner
Coulter suggested that these minutes were one end of brevity and future minutes
could be expanded a bit to capture more sense of discussion.

MOTION: by
Commissioner Chin, 2nd by Commissioner Coulter for approval of the
minutes of November September 21, 2006 as amended.

Action: 5-0 AYE
(Chin, Coulter, Higueras, Munson and Kane)

AGENDA ITEM
#3: EUREKA VALLEY LIBRARY PEER REVIEW

Marilyn Thompson
reported that the total project budget for the branch is $4.3 million of which
$3million is the construction budget. The current building is approximately
5,500 sq’ and it will have an 800 sq’ expansion. There will be a 12% increase
in shelf space.

Mr. Sowers
reported that there have been three community meetings to discuss schematic
design and to determine what the neighborhood wants to see in the renovated
branch. He highlighted many of the outstanding existing features of the branch
and he presented the proposed design plan and furniture layout. He reviewed
the lighting, roof, window, elevation, and interior improvement plans.

Brian Bannon,
Chief of Branches, commented on the schematic designs discussed at the branch
staff level. He said that proposed enhanced exhibit space was highly desirable
and program space is flexible throughout the branch with the introduction of
moveable furniture. Distinct teen and children’s spaces have been established
in the current schematic design. The service desk and work room work well in
the proposed locations and provide sight lines to the patio area. He felt that
this design works well for future public service demands.

Marilyn Thompson
introduced peer panelists Bonnie Bridges, Boor Bridges Architecture; Donald
Cremers, SMWM; and Gerald Takano, TBA West, Inc. Bonnie Bridges said that she
felt the design of the branch was well done and took into consideration the
comments of community. She said the high and low ceiling spaces and their
lines of influence have been addressed in the design and that they should be
responded to further as the finishes and lighting are developed. She suggested
that there is an outdoor space possibility with the southern patio space but
there would need to be some solutions to potential security problems. She
suggested that a door could be added to the staff room to enable staff response
to an emergency in the patio and that a community room could be added to the
southern portion of the property if funds ever became available.

Donald Cremers
said the panelists were all in agreement that the outdoor access from the
children’s area was highly desirable. The existing garden area should be
opened up to bring the patio and walkway together. Flooring elements and
patterns could be introduced to emphasize the higher and lower ceiling areas. He
commended the design team on the addition of the wood ceiling, pendant light
fixtures and the overall design.

Gerald Takano
said the peer review team worked under certain assumptions that were important:
this was a schematic review only and there was not enough information to review
the actual costs of the project; that the programmatic and schematic design had
staff and community input; and that a proposed GLBT museum would not have an
impact on what the team was reviewing. He said that this building was designed
by Appleton and Wolford and built in 1961 and stated the team felt the current
design respected the modernistic style of the building. He encouraged use of
movable furniture and said there are great possibilities for future expansion
in the patio and rear walkway areas. He advised the Commission to carefully
review program and construction costs.

Marilyn Thompson
thanked the panelists for sharing their design expertise to ensure that design
excellence continues to be an integral part of the bond program.

Public
Comment

Anonymous
citizen said the agenda did not include any mention of the program notes from
the community meetings that are available in the rear of the auditorium. The
agenda did not list the names or credentials of the peer review panelists. He
said that in a prior schematic design (Scheme A) there was a dramatic increase
in adult seating and a more modest increase in adult book space. Today’s
schematic design increases the teen area at the expense of the children’s and
adult areas. The patio area is the key feature of the branch and is ambiguous
in its current condition. He said the current walkway does not look like it is
being maintained by DPW.

Jim Buckley
expressed concern about how cold it will be when sitting near the north windows
and suggested improved lighting on the roof soffit on the Prosper St side of
the building since it is very dark at night. He said he wanted no changes to
the path near the courtyard.

Peter Warfield
said it would have been useful if he received all of the materials that were
available at the meeting in advance. He would have liked to have seen Mr.
Sowers’ program notes to see what program objectives were given to the
architect. He said that the library is making policy changes through design
and cited that there was no adult reference desk resulting in a reduction of
librarians. He said that self check out machines, pc’s, and adult media
present as you enter the branch are not the correct message that the library
should be providing. He liked to know more about how green the building is and
why the parking is retained in a city that encourages public transit. He
questioned if the parking lot has been considered for some other use. He said
he heard nothing today about the program requirements for books and seating.

Robin Lewis, Eureka Valley patron, said she was appreciative that she was able to be part of the
community meeting process and was thankful that alternatives for lighting were
being considered.

In response
to a question from Commissioner Coulter on floor finishes, Mr. Cremers stated
that the panelists were not in favor of distinct floor patterns to establish
specific areas such as teen or children’s sections but rather that that moveable
furniture and equipment should be used to establish distinct areas and allow
for future flexibility to meet program needs. Commissioners Coulter and
Higueras expressed concern for safety and security in the rear patio and
walkway. Brain Bannon responded that the area will be very visible from the
new staff room but said that he and branch staff will work with the project
architects for security enhancements to the patio and walkway areas. In
response to a question from Commissioner Chin, Mr. Herrera said that the City’s
Department of the Environment will handle disposition of existing furniture.
Patio access from the children’s section will be explored further by the branch
staff and project architects. Commissioner Higueras asked for a prominent
separation of the public restrooms and the children’s area. Philip Sowers
reviewed the methods of seismic strengthening that will be used and noted that
the Buffano artwork will remain in its current location. Commissioner Kane
commented that he thought it was a good not to have patio access directly from
the children’s section and reported he knew several branch patrons who are
thankful that parking is available at the branch. Brian Bannon explained
reasons for placement of public computers, self checkout units, new books and
media collections.

Luis Herrera thanked Supervisor Bevan Dufty for his
support of this project and noted the presence in the audience of Rachelle
McManus from Supervisor Dufty’s office.

Ms Thompson
noted that only one bid was received for Richmond Branch renovation. The
current budget is $7.1 million and the bid was $9.985 million. By rejecting the
bid and releasing the subcontractors, the City has the option to negotiate on
the cost without changing the scope of work. The bid is being evaluated as
well as the estimate to understand more fully what differences exist. Even if
the negotiation process does not yield a bid that the Library can afford,
project management staff will have a better understanding of the pricing and
clarity on how to revise the scope of the project if necessary.

Public
Comment

Anonymous
citizen said that there was no rainy season report and the rainy season looked
problematic from the slide shown of Noe Valley Branch. He said it would be
helpful to hear from the staff that BLIP is prepared for the rainy season. He
said he hoped the report on the cost of Richmond Branch renovations sent a
chill down everyone’s spine. He said it should give serious pause that out of
fourteen possible contractors only one submitted a bid. He said reduction of
the scope of the project would be a betrayal to the citizens.

Peter Warfield said
he would like to see presentation material in advance and thanked Marilyn
Thomson for the legible program statistics on the furniture layout sheet. He
thanked the Commission President for addressing computer locations, rationale
for self check, reference questions and media versus books when discussing
Eureka Valley Branch during the peer review process. He said he would like to
hear more about how “green” the buildings are becoming and asked what the
Library’s policy and efforts are to make branches “green.” He asked if it is the
program of the Library to cut staff by getting rid of reference desks and
adding self checkout machines.

In response
to a question by Commissioner Kane, Marilyn Thompson stated that the number of
bidders has been declining for all City departments, construction costs have
escalated and because there was only one bidder the construction cost
estimators feel that the estimate could be fifty percent off. Follow up calls
will be made to contractors who picked up bid packages but did not submit bids to
try to determine how to get greater participation in the bidding process. Ms.
Thompson described attempts at resolving complaints from an adjacent neighbor
regarding construction issues at West Portal Branch. She said the building
envelope could be compromised from a water proofing standpoint since this
neighbor has refused to give permission to allow access for applying stucco on
a small section of the west exterior wall.

Luis Herrera reported on community outreach to the
residents of the Richmond district and the neighborhood library campaign to
assure them that the Library is addressing the issues associated with the
single bid for Richmond Branch.

Please note: Copies of
Commission Minutes and handouts are available in the Office of the Commission
Secretary, 100 Larkin Street, San Francisco, CA 94102

Explanatory documents: Copies
of listed explanatory documents are available as follows: (1) from the
Commission Secretary/Custodian of Records, Main Library, 6th Floor, (2) in the
rear of the Koret Auditorium immediately before and during the meeting, and
(3)to the extent possible, on the Library's website at http://sfpl.org/. Additional
materials not listed as explanatory documents on this agenda, if any, that are
distributed to the Library Commissioners prior to or during the meeting in
connection with any agenda item will be available to the public for inspection
and copying in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.1 and Sunshine Ordinance
§§ 67.9, 67.28(b)& 67.28(d).

The public comment summary
statements included in these minutes are authorized by the San Francisco
Administrative Code Section 67.16.

These summary statements are
provided by the speaker. Their contents are neither generated by, nor subject
to approval or verification of accuracy by the San Francisco Public Library
Commission.

Public Comment of An Anonymous Citizen
San Francisco Public Library Commission Meeting, November 1 6, 2006
Item:
Public Comment
“Stop the Hate! Stop the Ignorance! Don’t Give Money to the Friends & Foundation. Don’t Accept Money from the Friends & Foundation.
Mr. Coulter’s first open taunting of me was “Are you having fun?” No one thought that seventeen years later I would be throwing the same taunt back at him.
The taunt changed to ‘Get a life.’ which is both the same and different.
A Leonard Cohen song contains, “They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom for trying to change the system from within.’ If that is what ‘get a life’ means, Mr. Coulter has a point.
A complete reversal would have someone new like Commissioner Munson asking Mr. Coulter if he is having fun. Mr. Coulter has now been coming to these meetings as long as I had then, and if it is a waste of a life, he has wasted his life.
Experience teaches us all something.
‘Are you having fun?”

Public Comment of An Anonymous Citizen
San Francisco Public Library Commission Meeting, November 16, 2006
Item 2:
Approval of the Minutes: October 19, 2006
“Stop the Corporate Rape of the Public Library Don’t Give Money to the Friends & Foundation. I)on’t Accept Money from the Friends & Foundation.
These minutes show the presence of a new hand. The minutes fluctuate in cycles. I am sure you will have another policy discussion without proper notice.
Each of the four people who spoke under public comment were misrepresented.
Ms. Garepis talked about being a donor and Paul Revere School being the proper site for the preschool. By selecting non-representative examples, you transformed her from an opponent to a supporter of the preschool.
Ms. Shucks spoke carefully of two incidents involving the security guards. One involved hassling someone, and the other was a child who was told incorrectly that she was too young to be in the library. The City Librarian said he took these issues very seriously and would look into them. This should have been in the minutes.”

Public Comment of An Anonymous Citizen
San Francisco Public Library Commission Meeting, November 16, 2006
Item 3:
Eureka Valley Library Peer Review
“Stop the Hate! Stop the ignorance! Don’t Give Money to the Friends & Foundation. Don’t Accept Money from the Friends & Foundation.
There are explanatory documents for this item, but there are no explanatory documents listed on the agenda. There is also nothing about the credentials of the persons on the peer review panel although I mention it every time.
There is a ‘Scheme A’ that was presented to a community meeting. A comparison reveals a dramatic increase in adult seating and an increase in book space and the present scheme is markedly reduced. There is no record of the community’s advocacy for this or what gains were made to offset that sacrifice.
The patio area is ambiguous and there is no indication of how that problem will be solved. It is not clear that the idyllic pathway belongs to the library.”

Public Comment of An Anonymous Citizen
San Francisco Public Library Commission Meeting, November 16, 2006
hem 4:
Bond Program Manager’s Report
“Stop the Hate! Stop the Ignorance! Don’t Give Money to the Friends & Foundation. Don’t Accept Money from the Friends & Foundation.
The concept of ‘natural linoleum’ seems like a strange oxymoron.
We didn't get a rainy season report. We have had issues with projects where contractors were late preparing for the rainy season and there were charges and countercharges back and forth.
This looks problematic with respect to the slide of Noe Valley. It would be nice to be reassured by the staff that we are prepared for the rainy season.
The discussion of Richmond sent a chill down all of our spines. We had fourteen contractors involved in a preliminary stage and ended up with one bidder. It looks like very nearly 50% over budget. Does this reflect the future scope of being overbudget?
The option of ‘reducing the scope of the project’ will be regard as a betrayal to the citizens.”